The American Jewish Committee announced that its executive director David Harris, who has run away from his own challenge to debate Walt and Mearsheimer, was "invited" by Huffington Post to start offering his views there. Harris already blogs for the Jerusalem Post. His latest is on the Goldstone report. I wonder where he comes down!
Too bad about the Huffington Post. It shows that PEP is a meaningful force in American political life: progressive except Palestine. Today on the Washington Post editorial page, Steve Walt, who made his reputation as a realist, not a progressive, spoke warningly of apartheid in Israel/Palestine. But liberals can’t say this. Most of em don’t anyway. Why not? Cause they’re Progressive Except Palestine. Yes, the Israel lobby is among us. Imagine Huffington Post during the days of segregation, hiring segregationists to defend Jim Crow. That’s what’s happening. And of course it has to do with the Jewish presence in the Establishment, including LA, New York, Arianna Huffington’s migration pattern…
Harris’s presence at Huffpo also underlines something Jeff Blankfort says: that one purpose of the Israel lobby is to evangelize American Jews on the importance of Israel. You have all these Jews who have never been there but are part of a community that is Israel-right-or-wrong. And they have to be kept on board. Huffpo is one way to reach ‘em.
“Strike three.
None of this is to suggest that Israel should be immune from scrutiny or is incapable of error. Neither is the case.
It is to suggest that Israel, as a democratic country which places a premium on the rule of law and an independent judiciary, has the capacity to examine allegations of misconduct — as it has in the past, and as it must.
It’s also to suggest that if the international community claims a role for itself in such matters, then it needs to be consistently applied around the world and impartially structured, leaving the conclusions to the end, not the beginning.
And finally, this story ought to be a cautionary tale for the United States, indeed all democratic states engaged in warfare today, especially in asymmetrical situations against non-state actors.
Whether it’s Hamas or the Taliban, these groups don’t give a hoot about international human rights or humanitarian law, yet they’re not averse to seeing the rules of the game applied to the other side.
They use innocent civilians as shields. Terrorists callously embed themselves in population centers, including schools, hospitals and mosques, inviting attack, so as to trigger cries of revulsion from the likes of the UN Human Rights Council. And right on cue, there’s the Council.”
He’s a little over the top, about as much as those that publish here.
Israel has demonstrated time and time again that it does not have the capacity to examine allegations of misconduct, because ultimately, the misconduct is policy.
When it comes to human rights, Israel has demonstared nothign but contempt for the idea, unless it affects Israelis. In that regard, Israel is n o better than Hamas or the Taliban.
Speaking of not being averse to seeing the rules of the game applied to the other side, I seem to recall Israel waving UN Resolutions in the air like some flag about Hezbollah being disarmed, yet resolutions against Israel are laughed at in Tel Aviv.
Israel uses innocent civilians as shields. The callously embed themselves in population centers, after all, liek Hamas, the IDF have homes to go to right?
I often laught at Israelis shills like Ricahrd who harp on about how bad terroism is, when Israel stands as a monumewnt to the success of terrorism. A state founded on terrorism, by terorists, which elected 2 such terrorist leaders to the highest office.
Because false equivalencies? Always a useful contribution to the debate, Witty.
Here’s a clue. If you think everyone else is over the top and irrational… well, then probably, you’ve got it backwards.
And again, PEP on Palestine is mutual humanization, not prejudicial condemnation.
Wow. Totally botching that actually goes a long way to proving the point about how inconsistent that viewpoint is. Thanks!
That was “progressive on Palestine”.
Have you noticed that you’re talking to yourself?
Not as much as you.
I am a courageous dissenter here.
Here’s a small reward for all of here who have to put up with Witty’s dull stuck record
record needle–it’s hilarious–involving real life here in the USA, as it nearly became
thrillingly symbolized by a new meathead version of our nation’s flag as crafted and
bestowed by those specially annointed congressional consultants, ADL & AIPAC–
link to palestinechronicle.com
No, Witty–it’s Phil and Adam who are courageous here, and all those here who’s critiques of our country’s foreign policy you don’t like. You’re not exactly the White Rose; rather more like a fellow student that glanced at their leaflet and tattled on
them. What risk do you take peddling the USA & Israel’s hasbara?
Witty, your bravery is an inspiration to us all. I would worry that people would think I was crazy if I posted so much disjointed self speak (or is it self talk, I can never remember the langauge you speak). Why, if those cowards like anarchists against the wall, the demonstrators in Bilin and Nilin, were only as brave as you. The number of people I have seen you convert to your way of thinking is nothing less than inspiring.
And not just brave, a true humanitarian. To have advanced the belief that it is wrong for the ethnically cleansed refugees from Palestine to be allowed tourist visas to visit their former homes. Amazing. After all, they shouldn’t live in their homes, because that would be unfair to them, they would be a minority in a democratic state.
You truly are an inspiration for the masses.
Sorry, the above should read, “the refugees should be allowed tourist visas to visit their former homes.”
potsherd, he is simply citing the last paragraph. I was a bit puzzled first.
He leaves out the last line though.
Biased UN body. Biased mandate. Biased panel. Three strikes and you’re out. Once again, the UN Human Rights Council whiffs on a chance to do good.
Substituting it with this:
He’s a little over the top, about as much as those that publish here.
I actually think he is hysterical and that it harms his own argument.
I am watching Harris for quite some time now. He has a peculiar sting that makes me suspicious in contexts I am basically prepared to listen. He hasn’t much sensitivity for anything beyond Israel, antisemitism and the US but is swift with judgments that fall like a guillotine and often feels like a collective condemnation. But then, I am not his target audience but among his objects of study [European].
You need to stop drinking kool-aid. When will Welt admit that Israel is committing apartheid rather than merely “warn” about the possibility that Israel just might, if it is careless, perhaps one day, in the fullness of time, become in certain aspects like a state that could be described, mutatis mutandis, as not enough dissimilar from Apartheid? When? When they begin commercializing Palestinian chopped liver? Or not even then?
Welt is going to the Washington Post to provide the White House with excuses for “failing” in what it has not intention of achieving, excuses that the White House will value, so maybe he will get back in the good grace of the inner circle, and he gets cheered for his courage around here.
Bull eye for suckerdom!
RE: “…LA, New York, Arianna Huffington’s migration pattern…” – Phil Weiss
MY COMMENT: Phil, you are a “nasty, bad, naughty boy”*! (lol)
*Senator Larry Craig calling Bill Clinton a nasty, bad, naughty boy – link to youtube.com
RE: ” Too bad about the Huffington Post.” – Phil(l) Weiss
MY COMMENT: I saw this coming a long time ago and especially after ‘HuffPo’ raised $25 million from venture capitalists. Right after the last election, I substituted ‘Raw Story’ for ‘HuffPo’ as my primary, general news aggregator. They also have some good investigative articles of their own – link to rawstory.com
You guys need to start thinking about plans for mutual peace, so that it can actually happen.
The dissent approach is laudable for those that genuinely do not have the power of persuasion or conception of alternative to take the next steps to proposal.
The liberals that you bash however, have taken the next step. They’ve taken in already “this is wrong”, but proceed to “what can be done about it?”
But, rather than defer to their leadership and assist their efforts and suggestions, you adopt the approach that because liberal proposals involve some compromise, even fundamental, from Palestinians, that they are condemnable.
The opposite is true. The liberal approach, the mutually humanizing, the persuasive approach, has the potential of change. Whereas the condemnatory only has the potential for escalation.
Sounds nice, except that the Obama Administration’s response to the Goldstone report specifically condemned Hamas atrocities, but not Israeli atrocities. Any Palestinian who trusts Obama as an honest broker after that is a fool.
As for constructive efforts–change the political climate here, bit by bit. Make it harder for politicians to get away with this sort of BS. Don’t praise them for lying, for one-sidedness, and don’t pretend they’re progressive when they wave the flag of tribalism.
Weiss: “And of course it has to do with the Jewish presence in the Establishment, including LA, New York, Arianna Huffington’s migration pattern…”
This goes to the problem of PEP across nearly the entire Democrat Establishment, so why not target the Zionist center of power instead of mostly just the media apparatchiks backing up its policies? Of course, you’ll have to look at disproportionate Jewish representation in the upper levels of the Party; disproportionate Jewish financing of the Party; disproportionate Jewish involvement in the entire Democratic national apparatus…
It’s pretty clear at this point that if a guy with Obama’s background is completely unable to scratch the service of entrenched Zionist power in America, there are serious institutional barriers within left-liberalism beyond just media that are sabotaging the reform effort.
Witty you are anything but courageous. No one here badgers you like, let’s say the far right Zionist trolls who invaded the blog during the Gaza massacre.
They are all gone now. Everyone here remembers the obscene way they spoke – both literally and intellectually.
Here’s some prime examples of your dishonest talking points, Witty:
Israel frequently breaks IHL. That’s why the international community steps in.
Israel is occupying another people and their land. That’s why the international community steps in.
Israel isn’t breaking it’s own domestic laws on let’s say, jay-walking. It’s committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.
A cautionary tale? A cautionary tale of what exactly? You are simplifying the I-P conflict as a ‘War on Terror’? The US invaded and destroyed Iraq. There was no civil war before they invaded.
What is the point of this paragraph anyway? You make it seem like Israel went on vacation in Mexico and got an STD.
“A cautionary tale, when you travel to an exotic [doesn't matter where, you have to juxtapose 'European' next to anything 'alien' in the orientalist vein] locale, where protection!”
That’s how ridiculous you sound, Witty. This is not a ‘cautionary tale’. It’s not some episode. It’s not a bad week in Cancun. It’s not a brochure for tourists.
This is business as usual.
You assume too much about their morality. I don’t know anything about the Taliban. However, Hamas is a legitimately elected representative of a people – the Palestinians. They have responsibilities. They have failed militarily but judging them in and of themselves would be unfair. You have to judge them in context to their capacity and who they are up against.
Morally speaking, I do not know what they think of IHL. You should do some more research into this. Your argument is not convincing. It’s based on nothing actually – since you A) haven’t provided any sources to explain your one-liners in the past and B) you haven’t even read the UN report.
Hamas is a non-State actor and so they would be treated in a different way. However, Israel despite being a State actor will not be treated any which way, at all. Israel – like the US – can escape punishment. Hamas is subjected to punishment simply for existing.
Furthermore, you make it seem as though the UN report – like the many reports BEFORE it – is going to change something. It won’t. I think the great majority of the world is disgusted w/ Zionism and the Israeli State.
I’m beginning to think Witty is paid to post here. It’s not like we do not know him by now. I have been coming to Mondoweiss for 2 years (I was LD in the past). I know Witty’s style. I’m sure newcomers here have grown to be agitated at least and disgusted at best w/ his apologetics.
Again, I ask you Witty:
Prove that Hamas A) used human shields in the Gaza massacre. If so, then B) further prove that this is the reason for the civilian deaths.
The only reason we talk about human shields so much is how they relate as a tactic, to the deaths of civilians.
So it’s not simply to point out a deplorable tactic – morally and logistically – but to also prove or disprove something about the deaths of civilians.
So Israel often kills lots and lots of civilians. In Lebanon, Israel killed 1000+ civilians.
What did the US Army War College conclude?
That there was no meaningful intermingling w/ civilians by Hezbollah fighters. Furthermore, Hezbollah used uniforms. Furthermore, Hezbollah fought away from civilians. Furthermore, most of the civilians had already fled. Furthermore, much of this evidence was accredited to interviews w/ IDF participants.
So there is your CONTEXT. The context is, whoever Israel fights – they always blame them for the civilian death toll by using the human shield argument.
Witty is not grouping Hamas and the Taliban. Why? They are not the same. They are not even similar. Hamas fought off Al Qaeda. Hamas is not as extremist as the Taliban. Hamas was elected by the Palestinians fairly. Hamas has NOT been proven to have used human shields in Gaza.
So why do you keep saying this, Witty?
Prove it. For once, cite an source to back up your abstract rhetoric.
And like I said, it’s not enough if they did it once – as horrible as it would be – you are only referring to the human shield argument because it is used by apologists like you, to absolve Israel of the high civilian death toll.
“Oh those, 1000 dead Lebanese? That was Hezbollah using human shields! Ask Tom Friedmann!”
“Oh those, 800 dead Palestinian civilians? 300 children? That was Hamas hiding amongst civilians!”
That’s the context. No one would bring it up to refer to isolated incidents. They bring it up, implying a systematic pattern of behavior.
Answer these questions Witty. You do not grow intellectually as someone else has stated. You simply talk to yourself. You are a ‘point-scorer’ as defined by the World Union of Jewish Students publication, ‘Hasbara Handbook: Promoting Israel on Campus’.
This is you Witty:
Insincere. Dishonest. Superficial. Reinforcing a narrative rather than growing and adapting via honest debate.
“Hamas has NOT been proven to have used human shields in Gaza.
So why do you keep saying this, Witty?”
In ‘fairness’ the whole ‘the enemy integrates with civilians, what are we supposed to do ?’ ruse is an American one that the Israeli’s and their hasbara accolytes have adopted, in just about every theatre the US has been involved in since Vietnam (who disguised hand grenades as babies, or used babies as hand grenades and so forth) the enemy has always apparently done this – the claim is a Pavlovian reflex at this point.
We of course, do know that the Irgun or whatever they’re calling themselves these days use Palestinians as human shields as B’Tselem have footage of such activities.
Pingback: The Progressive Mind » Huffpep